Iran: Historical Legacies, Political Structures, and Contemporary Strategies

Emil M. Hasanov
Chairman (Founder)
Emil M. Hasanov is a distinguished expert in international security and post‑conflict recovery, with more than two decades of leadership across the United Nations, U.S. Department...
- Chairman (Founder)
15 Min Read

Abstract

This article examines the historical legacies and contemporary strategies of the Islamic Republic of Iran, situating its political system and foreign policy within the broader context of global power competition. It traces Iran’s trajectory from the Constitutional Revolution and foreign occupations of the 20th century through the Pahlavi monarchy, the 1953 coup, and the 1979 Islamic Revolution, highlighting how these experiences shaped institutions that fuse clerical authority with republican structures.

The study explores Iran’s reliance on proxy warfare, its record of hostage crises, and the successes and failures of its regional operations.

A central focus is Iran’s asymmetric relationship with China, which has become Tehran’s primary economic lifeline through discounted oil exports and limited investment by Chinese state companies. This dependence is contrasted with China’s pragmatic approach, treating Iran as a partner of convenience rather than a strategic ally.

The paper integrates historical analysis of President Nixon’s 1972 visit to China – an opening that reshaped Cold War dynamics – with the forthcoming visit of President Trump to Beijing in March-April 2026. The latter underscores how Iran now sits at the intersection of U.S.-China competition.

A scenario matrix is presented to evaluate possible outcomes of U.S.-China-Iran relations after Trump’s visit, including best-case, worst-case, and most likely trajectories, as well as the contingency of Iran’s collapse under U.S.-Israeli pressure. The findings emphasize that Iran’s fate is deeply intertwined with the strategic calculations of Washington and Beijing, while China’s energy security and the United States’ geopolitical leverage remain decisive factors.

 

Introduction

Iran’s political system and regional behavior cannot be understood without reference to its turbulent 20th-century history. From constitutional reform and foreign occupation to monarchy, revolution, and the establishment of the Islamic Republic, Iran’s trajectory produced institutions that fuse clerical authority with republican structures.

Today, governance is marked by overlapping councils, powerful security organs, and a foreign policy that relies heavily on proxy networks. This paper analyzes Iran’s historical turning points, current institutions, proxy strategies, hostage crises, operational record, and relations with China, while situating Iran-China ties within the broader evolution of U.S.-China relations since President Nixon’s landmark 1972 visit and President Trump’s forthcoming 2026 summit in Beijing.

 

1. Political History of Iran in the 20th Century

The Constitutional Revolution (1905-1911) introduced Iran’s first parliament (Majles), limiting monarchical power and embedding the principle of popular representation. Yet foreign interference undermined sovereignty, particularly the 1907 Anglo-Russian Convention dividing Iran into spheres of influence.

With British support, Reza Khan led the 1921 coup that toppled the Qajar dynasty, and in 1925 he established the Pahlavi Dynasty. The Pahlavi Dynasty (1925-1979) centralized authority under Reza Shah and later Mohammad Reza Shah. Modernization programs expanded infrastructure and education but marginalized clerical influence.

The 1941 Allied Occupation saw Britain and the Soviet Union invade Iran to secure oil fields and supply routes to the USSR. Reza Shah’s pro-German sympathies and refusal to expel German nationals heightened Allied concerns. The occupation lasted until 1946, with U.S. forces joining later to secure logistics for the “Persian Corridor,” a vital supply line for Lend-Lease aid.

This forced Reza Shah’s abdication in favor of his son, Mohammad Reza Shah. After being compelled to step down in 1941, Reza Shah Pahlavi spent his final years in exile in South Africa, living in Johannesburg until his death in July 1944.

The 1953 coup, orchestrated by the CIA and MI6, overthrew Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh after his attempt to nationalize oil, reinforcing authoritarian monarchy and weakening democratic institutions.

The 1979 Islamic Revolution overthrew the Shah, establishing the Islamic Republic under Ayatollah Khomeini. This fused religious authority with republican institutions, embedding clerical dominance into governance.

 

2. Current Political System

Iran’s system is a hybrid of elected bodies and unelected religious authorities:

  • Supreme Leader: Holds ultimate authority over security, judiciary, media, and foreign policy.
  • Guardian Council: Reviews legislation and vets candidates for elections.
  • Majles (Parliament): Elected body, but subject to Guardian Council approval.
  • Assembly of Experts: Clerical body that appoints and can dismiss the Supreme Leader.
  • President: Elected executive responsible for day-to-day governance but subordinate to the Supreme Leader.
  • Expediency Discernment Council: Mediates disputes between parliament and Guardian Council.
  • The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and Intelligence Services: Parallel military and security structures ensuring regime survival.
 

3. Security and Proxy Warfare

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), founded in 1979, protects the revolution and has become a powerful military, political, and economic actor. It oversees the Quds Force, Basij militia, and aerospace/naval branches.

Since the early 1980s, Iran has pursued proxy warfare to expand influence:

  • Hezbollah (Lebanon): Founded in 1982 with IRGC support during Israel’s invasion.
  • Hamas (Palestine): Supported since the late 1980s as part of Iran’s opposition to Israel.
  • Houthis (Yemen): Iran began supporting the Houthi movement in the 2000s.
  • Shi’a Militias in Iraq: Groups such as Kata’ib Hezbollah and Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq have been cultivated since the U.S. invasion in 2003.
 

4. Hostage Crises and International Confrontations

  • U.S. Embassy Hostage Crisis (1979-1981): Iranian students seized the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, holding 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.
  • Lebanon Hostage Crisis (1980s-1990s): Hezbollah, backed by Iran, kidnapped Western hostages in Beirut.
 

5. Iran’s Operations: Successes and Failures

Successful Operations

  • Establishment of Hezbollah as a durable proxy.
  • Survival of Assad’s regime in Syria through IRGC/Quds Force intervention.
  • Expansion of influence in Iraq post-2003.
 

Unsuccessful Operations

  • Attempts to export revolution to Gulf monarchies in the 1980s largely failed.
  • Support for Hamas has been inconsistent.
  • Covert plots abroad have often been disrupted.
 

6. Iran-China Relations

China is Iran’s largest trading partner, importing nearly 90% of Iran’s exported oil, which accounted for about 13-14% of China’s total crude imports in 2025.

  • CNPC (China National Petroleum Corporation): Entered Iran in the early 2000s, invested in Kish Island (2007), and took over South Pars Phase 11 in 2009.
  • Sinopec: Signed contracts for the Yadavaran oil field in the mid-2000s and expanded refining cooperation.
 

Timeline

  • 2000-2004: Initial entry into upstream projects.
  • 2007: CNPC investment in Kish Island.
  • 2009: CNPC takeover of South Pars Phase 11.
  • 2010-2013: Sinopec expands refining cooperation.
  • 2018: Scale-back due to U.S. sanctions.
  • 2021: 25-year cooperation agreement signed.
  • 2025-2026: Continued indirect trade; limited direct investment.
 

7. Nixon’s 1972 Visit to China

President Richard Nixon’s visit to China in February 1972, meeting Premier Zhou Enlai, marked a turning point in U.S.-China relations. The strategy was orchestrated by Henry Kissinger, Nixon’s National Security Advisor. Nixon’s opening to China sought to exploit the Sino-Soviet split, reduce Cold War tensions, and create leverage against Moscow.

  • For China: Recognition by a major power, breaking diplomatic isolation, and eventual entry into the UN Security Council.
  • For the U.S.: Exploiting the Sino-Soviet split provided strategic leverage against the USSR, opened new trade channels, and reshaped Cold War dynamics, while China’s access to Western technology and commerce reinforced its independence from Moscow.
  • Cooperation Began: Cultural exchanges, trade contacts, groundwork for normalization in 1979.
 

8. Trump’s 2026 Visit to China

President Trump’s official visit to Beijing (March 31-April 2, 2026) is framed around trade and economic negotiations, but Iran looms in the background. The U.S. will press China to limit support for Tehran, while Beijing will balance its oil lifeline to Iran with its broader relationship with Washington.

 

9. Scenario Matrix: U.S.-China-Iran Relations After Trump’s Visit

Possible outcomes after Trump’s 2026 visit to Beijing
Scenario Description Implication
Best Case U.S. and China reach trade deals; China quietly reduces visible support for Iran while continuing discounted oil imports. Stabilizes U.S.-China ties; Iran remains economically afloat but politically isolated.
Worst Case Talks collapse; China openly defends Iran and expands cooperation. Escalates U.S.-China rivalry; Iran gains diplomatic cover but risks sanctions.
Most Likely Trade agreements proceed; China condemns U.S. strikes rhetorically but avoids confrontation. Continuity; China remains Iran’s economic lifeline but prioritizes U.S. trade.
Iran Falls Under U.S.-Israel Pressure If Tehran’s regime weakens or collapses, China shifts oil sourcing to Russia, Gulf states, or Africa. U.S. regains dominance in Gulf energy; China adapts pragmatically, avoids confrontation, but loses leverage in Iran.
 

10. Consequences of Historical Trajectories

  • Legacy of Foreign Intervention: Deep suspicion of Western powers shapes Iran’s foreign policy.
  • Fusion of Religion and Politics: Clerical dominance stems from the revolution’s rejection of monarchy and secularism.
  • Security State: The IRGC’s rise reflects lessons from the Shah’s downfall.
  • Institutional Complexity: Overlapping councils preserve clerical supremacy at the expense of democratic accountability.
 

Conclusion

Iran’s current political system and regional strategies are deeply rooted in its 20th-century experiences: foreign occupation, monarchy, revolution, and confrontation with the West. Its institutions prioritize clerical dominance and regime survival, while its proxy networks project power abroad.

Relations with China illustrate Iran’s reliance on Beijing for economic survival, while Nixon’s 1972 opening to China contextualizes the broader U.S.-China rivalry that continues to shape Iran’s geopolitical environment today.

Trump’s 2026 visit to Beijing underscores how Iran now sits at the intersection of U.S.-China competition. Washington seeks to constrain Tehran through sanctions and military pressure, while Beijing continues to import Iranian oil at discounted rates, balancing its economic lifeline to Iran with its broader trade priorities with the U.S. Whether Iran remains resilient or succumbs to external pressure, its fate will continue to be intertwined with the strategic calculations of Washington and Beijing.

 

References

  1. Ervand Abrahamian, A History of Modern Iran (Cambridge University Press, 2008).
  2. Ali Ansari, Modern Iran Since 1921: The Pahlavis and After (Pearson, 2003).
  3. Nikki R. Keddie, Modern Iran: Roots and Results of Revolution (Yale University Press, 2006).
  4. Richard Stewart, Persian Corridor to Victory (U.S. Army Center of Military History, 1988).
  5. Abbas Milani, The Shah (Palgrave Macmillan, 2011).
  6. Mark J. Gasiorowski, “The 1953 Coup d’Etat in Iran,” International Journal of Middle East Studies 19, no. 3 (1987).
  7. Hamid Dabashi, Iran: A People Interrupted (New Press, 2007).
  8. Wilfried Buchta, Who Rules Iran? The Structure of Power in the Islamic Republic (Washington Institute, 2000).
  9. Shirin Ebadi, Iran Awakening (Random House, 2006).
  10. Mehrzad Boroujerdi, “Majles and Legislative Politics in Iran,” Carnegie Endowment, 2016.
  11. Farideh Farhi, “The Assembly of Experts and the Iranian Political System,” Middle East Journal 44, no. 4 (1990).
  12. Suzanne Maloney, Iran’s Political Economy since the Revolution (Cambridge University Press, 2015).
  13. Saeid Golkar, “Iran’s Expediency Council,” Middle East Policy 21, no. 4 (2014).
  14. Afshon Ostovar, Vanguard of the Imam: Religion, Politics, and Iran’s Revolutionary Guards (Oxford University Press, 2016).
  15. Steven Ward, Immortal: A Military History of Iran and Its Armed Forces (Georgetown University Press, 2009).
  16. Augustus Richard Norton, Hezbollah: A Short History (Princeton University Press, 2007).
  17. Matthew Levitt, Hezbollah: The Global Footprint of Lebanon’s Party of God (Georgetown University Press, 2013).
  18. Michael Knights & Alex Almeida, “The Houthi War Machine,” CTC Sentinel (2019).
  19. Phillip Smyth, “Iranian Militias in Iraq and Syria,” Washington Institute, 2015.
  20. Mark Bowden, Guests of the Ayatollah (Atlantic Monthly Press, 2006).
  21. Magnus Ranstorp, Hizb’allah in Lebanon (Macmillan, 1997).
  22. Nader Hashemi & Danny Postel, Sectarianization (Oxford University Press, 2017).
  23. Kenneth Katzman, Iran’s Foreign and Defense Policies (Congressional Research Service, 2024).
  24. Columbia University, Center on Global Energy Policy, “Iran’s Oil Trade With China – What To Know” (2026).
  25. Tehran Bureau, “The Iranian Interests of Chinese Energy Giants, Part 1: CNPC” (2023).
  26. John Calabrese, “China-Iran Energy Relations: Strategic or Transactional?” Middle East Institute (2021).
  27. Esfandyar Batmanghelidj, “Iran-China 25-Year Agreement,” European Council on Foreign Relations (2021).
  28. Margaret MacMillan, Nixon and Mao: The Week That Changed the World (Random House, 2007).
  29. Chen Jian, Mao’s China and the Cold War (UNC Press, 2001).
  30. Henry Kissinger, White House Years (Simon & Schuster, 1979).
  31. Abbas Milani, The Shah (Palgrave Macmillan, 2011).
  32. Hamid Dabashi, Iran: A People Interrupted (New Press, 2007).
  33. Saeid Golkar, Captive Society (Columbia University Press, 2015).
  34. Mehran Kamrava, Iran’s Intellectual Revolution (Cambridge University Press, 2008).
  35. Reuters/US News, “Attack on Iran Could Buoy Trump in Talks With China’s Xi” (March 3, 2026).

Share This Article
Chairman (Founder)
Follow:
Emil M. Hasanov is a distinguished expert in international security and post‑conflict recovery, with more than two decades of leadership across the United Nations, U.S. Department of State programs, OSCE, EU, and other global institutions. He has served as a strategic adviser to UN peacekeeping in Darfur, Sudan, and directed stabilization initiatives funded by the U.S. Department of State. His fieldwork spans Yemen, Iran, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Ukraine, Georgia, and operations along the Afghanistan and Syrian borders, where he led missions on disarmament, conventional weapons management, and post‑war recovery. Mr. Hasanov’s academic foundation combines law studies at the University of Geneva and Baku State University (LL.M) with advanced training at leading institutions including Cranfield Defense Academy (UK), Carleton University (Canada), George Washington University (USA), Thunderbird School of Global Management, and SOAS, University of London. His career reflects a unique blend of legal expertise, operational leadership, and external affairs. He has advised on communications and external relations with BP AGT, engaging with diplomatic corps, senior officials, and heads of state. He is also co‑founder of the Club de Genève, a platform fostering dialogue among policymakers and scholars. Beyond policy and operations, Mr. Hasanov has established a strong profile in communications and media, serving as author and anchor of GEOPOLITICS talk shows, publishing widely on international relations, and producing documentaries on conflict and recovery. As Founder and Chairman of the International Center for Transatlantic Studies (ICTS), Mr. Hasanov brings this global expertise to advancing the Center’s mission: strengthening transatlantic cooperation, fostering innovative policy dialogue, and promoting collective security.